Microsoft Wins the High Ground in War with Google

Google’s spiteful and unreasonable blocking of YouTube services on Windows Phone reached absurd levels this past week: After Microsoft issued what it said was the officially sanctioned YouTube app for the platform, Google blocked it just a day later. In this astonishing Cold War between two of tech’s biggest giants, Microsoft has done the right thing by users and Google has not. Why is Google so afraid of Windows Phone?

As with previous issues between the two companies—the widely criticized but deadly-accurate Scroogled campaign, for example, or Google’s inane decision to end support for Exchange ActiveSync (EAS)—I’m more surprised by the absurd Google apologists I see in the press and in tech blogs than I am by Google’s standard user-adverse behavior. Folks, wake up. Google is consistently doing the wrong thing. The wrong thing morally and the wrong thing for users.

“Google asked us to transition our app to a new coding language, HTML5,” Microsoft corporate vice president David Howards explains. “This was an odd request since neither YouTube’s iPhone app nor its Android app are built on HTML5. Nevertheless, we dedicated significant engineering resources to examine the possibility. At the end of the day, experts from both companies recognized that building a YouTube app based on HTML5 would be technically difficult and time consuming, which is why we assume YouTube has not yet made the conversion for its iPhone and Android apps.”

“For this reason, we made a decision this week to publish our non-HTML5 app while committing to work with Google long-term on an app based on HTML5. We believe this approach delivers our customers a short term experience on par with the other platforms while putting us in the same position as Android and iOS in enabling an eventual transition to new technology. Google, however, has decided to block our mutual customers from accessing our new app.”

Howard goes on to explain that Google’s reasons for blocking this new version of the YouTube app for Windows Phone are completely “manufactured”—which they are—to ensure that Windows Phone users can’t have the same quality YouTube experience that users on iPhone and Android receive. “The roadblocks Google has set up are impossible to overcome, and they know it,” he adds.

More troubling, Howard explains that Google is using secret APIs in its own YouTube app implementations and that it won’t provide those APIs to Microsoft even though they’re required to provide the YouTube advertising experience that Google demands. Folks, that’s not ironic. It’s full-blown hypocritical.

“Google just doesn’t want Windows Phone users to have the same experience as Android and Apple users, and their objections are nothing other than excuses,” Howard says in a clear language that Microsoft should examine using more frequently. “Nonetheless, we are committed to giving our users the experience they deserve, and are happy to work with Google to solve any legitimate concerns they may have. In the meantime, we once again request that Google stop blocking our YouTube app.”

What has Microsoft done institutionally--and, please, choose an example from the past 15 years--that you would call "unethical"? Anything?

I feel that Google is in fact quite unethical, and there are many examples. But I don't feel that way about Microsoft. Stupid, sometimes. Slow, often. But not unethical.

So why do you feel this way? Just an out of date opinion based on pre-antitrust days? (And to be fair, this was Microsoft the big company acting like it was still a small company, but whatever. let's keep it current.)

Please, do take a long look at yourself. Or at least what you think of Microsoft. I don't get it.

Well, I'd say the patent-trolling is pretty unethical. Essentially Microsoft, and others, are using broad, vaguely defined patents of no techncal value, to extract a rent on other companies innovation and products. And it is not Google who ends up footing the bill. It is consumers (and in the end Microsoft, ironically). And just because you can do it legally, doesn't mean that it is okay.

But all that does not matter. Two wrongs does not make a right. Google is wrong on this. Power do in fact corrupt it seems.

Microsoft is not a patent troll. A patent troll is a company that only exists to extort money from others. Microsoft owns patents on intellectual property that it created or bought, and it licenses that technology to other firms.

Well, without arguing the precise semantics, I think that Microsoft behaves and acts very much like a patenttroll, or at least a "predatory user of technology licensing". And what is more important, I think that this is the view of those companies who agreed to Microsofts terms through gritted teeth.

When a company license an Arm core or a Wacom digitizer it is because those technologies are considered valuable and worth paying for. The licensing company feels better off, and there is no need for long lawyer meetings and restrictive NDAs. Mutual benefit leads to mutual trust.

But there is another and more sinister way of using the patent system, and that is to present a company with a long list of very broadly defined patents, and request a license to avoid the risk of years of litigation with uncertain outcome. The licensing company wil not feel they had any real choice or got anything valuable in return, and all trust then evaporates completely. That, I think, is the view of Samsung, LG, Motorola, Lenovo, Asus and many others. And I think, this has caused great harm to Microsoft, and made it very easy for Google to get the hardware vendors to embrace Googles platforms imperfect as they are.

Now I know, that any talk about platforms and technology quckly turns into a 'which team do you root for' talk, and I am certainly not unbiased. I am writing this on an HP laptop running Android. But the fact that there IS an HP laptop running android on the market, is in a way pretty telling.

Well, it seemed to me, that your were asking for a recent concrete example of Microsoft behaving unethically in a way that was detrimental to consumers and competition. I think Microsofts licensing campaign against asian electronics manfucturers using android fits that description very well. And while it may not be patent trolling in a strict legal sense, if indeed this is even legally defined, Microsofts campaign has all the same sorry qualities.

Now Microsoft may be legally in their right to do this, just as Google may be legally in their right to block Microsofts youtube App. But I thinks that is immaterial. Whether Google is in the right or in the wrong in a narrow legal sense, does not change the fact, that they are screwing entirely innocent users of Windows Phone, and they are doing this "because they can" essentially.

Exactly. I was. And you did not provide a valid example, as I expected.

And that is my point: People have all these opinions that are not supported by facts. "It seems to" is not in the case "the truth."

It is not that Microsoft is "legally" right to protect it's intellectual property. It has a responsibility to shareholders to do so. It would be illegal for it to not do so. They are right to do this. They have to do this. They do not do this because "they can." That is what Google does. And that, sir, was my original point.

Microsoft isn't a patent troll, because they actually develop software that they then implement and sell. Its not a matter of them writing some vague ideas and waiting for someone else to implement them - Microsoft actually implement those ideas themselves.

That's the big difference between MS and a patent troll. A patent troll is the same as domain squatting. They just try and hop in before the actual innovators and then extort them by exploiting legal tricks. But they never actually release any products to consumers during their "ownership period."

Microsoft, for all their faults, do everything on the intention of releasing products to market. That is completely the opposite of a patent troll.

Well, abandoning Plays For Sure when they came out with Zune was a d!ck move for sure.

Abandoning Windows 7 phones with no upgrade path wasn't a smart play either.

Keeping Office file formats proprietary to stifle competition was the same old Microsoft. (Yes I know there are newer formats now, but the older ones are still in wide use.)

There's a huge amount of lockin that still goes on in the Enterprise space: Sharepoint and Outlook don't really work on Macs correctly.

I know you think Microsoft has changed, but the effects of the bad old Microsoft persist. I don't know if this is unethical, but it reflects arrogant business tactics that the company is still struggling to discard.

All that said, you're right about google. After laughing at Bing, I now use it, mainly because it's NOT google. I'm switching my gmail accounts to other services.

I don't know if "unethical" is the right word for google. But it is true that they simply don't acknowledge user privacy as a concept, and that's really scary. Of course, it isn't obvious to me that email on Outlook.com (or me.com from Apple) is really any more secure than gmail. The vendors PROMISE to respect our privacy, but who really knows?

Google are clearly in the wrong here, but instead of just blocking access they are trying to make it out that its Microsoft's fault. If the app technically cannot be written in HTML5 then MS had to backward engineer the Ad API because Google would not give it to them. This is not a good situation as Google does not have any control over this API for any changes they make. So they legitimately can block access because it goes against their ToS. It's a no win situation for MS and I hope they take legal action.

Paul, I picked up a Lumia 521 based on the discussion on Windows Weekly to try out the platform. As I die hard Android guy, I am impressed and considering switching phones and carriers to the 1020. Almost all of the apps I use are on WP, but i'm really concerned if Google will ever support things like Google+ or Chromecast on WP. I'm guessing by this, they never will, which is bad for both platforms.

The point is that Google don't require HTML5 for any other developer for it to be "officially sanctioned."

Microsoft complied with the issues that Google, legitimately, complained of - that the app didn't allow ads to be displayed and therefore affected their revenue. The new app functions the same as apps on other competing platforms, such as iOS and Android. There is no reason t shouldn't be "officially sanctioned," which is the whole point of Paul's article.

Google are using their influence to unfairly hamper a competitor. That shouldn't be an attitude that is supported by consumers. Not if its by Microsoft, Apple, Google or anyone else. Its only ever for the company's benefit and NEVER for ours.

Google is obviously affraid of another major mobile platform otherwise they would make sure that their customers on any platform have the best experience in using their services. Similarly, Microsoft has been making sure that Office experience on Android is inferior to the experience on Windows. I really hope that products of both companies will lose to truly user oriented, platform independent products like Evernote.

I had a meeting this morning with a colleague who I am developing a Windows 8.1 App with. He asked if we should also develop an Android version. I mentioned the issue that Microsoft was having with their YouTube App and he found it unbelievable that a company the size of Google would try to dictate what language an App should be developed in. We both decided that the children who are running Google should grow up and until they do, developers should NOT take a chance that those children will prevent their Apps from running if they do not like the language that is used to develop them. How sad a commentary from a company who preaches openness, but in reality they are just playing games. I personally hope that the anti-trust arm of our government is observing what these children are doing will teach them a lesson or two.

So, wait... how is is this any different from Microsoft forcing people to use the WinRT runtime and not allowing access to Win32 APIs? I mean, the APIs are there, right... so third parties should be able to use them? Maybe if Microsoft allows Chrome on WinRT, google would share their *private* APIs as well.

I guess your "20 years ago" comment should have been "1 year ago"... or something like that.

I can only guess that the OP meant on WinRT (the OS) that has win32 APIs, but doesn't allow access to them for 3rd parties. There are some similarities, in that MS is using the "old" way to bootstrap existing tools (Office, explorer, many control panels before 8.1) but asking others to use only the "new" APIs.
The clear difference, of course, is that MS is requiring everyone (not just one competitor) to use the new APIs and is showing concerted effort to transitioning all their own legacy apps to the new APIs as well.
So, to the OP, yes there are some similarities, but the "evilness" of Google in this case is that they are one one (and only one) app developer to a new API, one in which they themselves do not use, and one that is widely reported to not be technically capable enough to actually use.

It is clear Google has a beef with Microsoft. I have used Metrotube on my WP8 and HyperTube and other YouTube apps on Windows 8 and NONE of them include advertising that the video normally would play pre-roll.
I don't see Google hyperventilating over those apps.
I don't personally use Metrotube often simply because I don't watch videos on my phone, but Google is certainly driving people away from using their service by limiting its access.

How many programmers are left at Microsoft from 30 years ago is hardly relevant, Paul. They wouldn't have pulled their dirty tricks without orders from on high. I believe that Ballmer (current CEO) and Gates (current Chairman) were both around at the time.

"Moral high ground"? Was Microsoft not secretly financing SCO's failed attempt to destroy Linux? That was 10 years ago, not 30.

So lets come right up to date. Microsoft is currently creaming off, what, $1 billion a year from Android OEMs, and for what? A bunch of so-called patents so bogus that Microsoft don't dare even make them public. Instead, they turn up at your company and make you sign an NDA before they tell you what "patents" you're supposed to be infringing! Little wonder that Mark Shuttleworth referred to Microsoft's "racketeering".

"Google has blocked access to this official YouTube app. Please use m.youtube.com as a temporary workaround. We continue to liase with with Google to remove this unnecessary and uncompetitive blocking on behalf of you, our customer."

I believe Google is actually afraid of WIndows Phone, which is attacking their primary market, low cost phones. The difference is Windows Phone is a quality user experience vs the Andriod on the same hardware class. I almost get the feeling Apple and Google have a deal to carve up the smartphone market. Apple taking the high end, and Google claiming the mid and low end market. This might explain why Apple, even though it's Google's biggest competion, gets a pass in situations like this.

One other thing comes to mind. Do you suppose this has anything to do with the lack of native access on Windows RT. Microsoft is pushing devs toward HTML5 and Javascript? Maybe a poke in the eye to demonstrate how difficult it can be for some applications.

alfawan, Microsoft may be pushing HTML5 and JavaScript on Win8, but not at the expense of other languages. You can write Win8 apps in a wide variety of languages, including native C++. All of the languages are on equal footing from a technical point of view (i.e. they have access to the same Win8 APIs). So, I highly doubt Google intends this as a poke in the eye to prove that some applications are difficult to code in HTML5 and JavaScript (which, BTW, is something Google has always promoted as the "champion of the Open Web").

Nah, Google's just playing dirty, and in the process the only folks they are hurting are the users. Eventually, such a stupid strategy will pan out to not be in their favor. In the past year, Google has been proving themselves to be highly incompetent and very anti-user.

Bootlicker theverge sides with google, saying its all Microsoft's own fault. Theverge rolls with Big Brother in exchange for early google story access. How utterly revolting they try to defend such abhorrent behavior.

Paul said: "Google is consistently doing the wrong thing. The wrong thing morally and the wrong thing for users." Perhaps in this case, but not consistently. I wouldn't have a smart phone now were it not for Android. The thought of using an iPhone and iTunes on my PC was abhorrent to me. (I can't even use a Windows Phone now since they haven't got a simple way to reject future calls from a number in the call log.)

I agree that Google's behavior is evil™, but what I don't understand and seems like an amateurish move on Microsoft's part is that after their first version of the app was blocked by Google, they did not get explicit permission from Google *before* releasing the app.

Ironically, 3rd party apps such as Metro Tube havent't been blocked and I seriously doubt the authors of those apps have more programming expertise than the team at Microsoft.

Google's actions are clearly directed at Microsoft, and Microsoft only.

When the MS Youtube app was blocked the first time and there was no option to get push notifications to work for my Gmail account on my brandnew Lumia 925 (EAS) I decided to turn my back on Google. It was just too obvious what was going on.

1) Google blocking the Windows Phone YouTube app is petty and vindictive. They are not only targeting Microsoft, they are essentially punishing their own users for using a Windows Phone device. And their stated reasons for doing so are obviously nothing but a legal alibi. Here is a large gap between doing what is proper, and what can be defended by a creative lawyer.

2) Microsoft is essentially making a public sympathy call, begging Google for acces to YouTube on Microsofts tiny platform. High ground or not, that is simply a disaster for Microsoft ! And they have to ask themeselves how things ended up like this?

3) Five to ten years ago Microsoft was the biggest member of a thriving ecosystem of hardware-makers, chip-manufacturers, software vendors and service providers. Microsoft has managed to anatagonise and repulse almost every former or potential ally, and in their current battle with Apple, Google, Samsung and others, they are all alone.

4) The relationship between Google and Microsoft can best be described as hatefull. How did it come to this? Why did Google push Docs, Android, Chrome and Chrome OS? And why did Microsoft launch Bing? Ballmer needs to understand, that if you pull a gun on someone and pull the trigger, the gun has better be loaded and ready. If not, dont expect any clemency later on.

5) Ballmer has been pulling a lot of unloaded guns lately. He must have felt pretty good when he managed to twist the arms of asian manufactures into paying for android-related licensing. Now those same OEM's are itching to abandon Microsoft and Windows for the uncharted waters of desktop Android, Chrome OS, Tizen, anything not Microsoft.

6) None of this really excuses Google in blocking their own YouTube users on Windows Phone. But someone in Microsoft-land needs to take a long hard look in the mirror before pointing any fingers.

I switched my browser default search from Google to DuckDuckGo last year. I started migrating from GMail to Outlook.com when I saw that Google was blocking the new YouTube app. There is no real alternative for YouTube though, I guess I could use MetroTube.

Signed the petition, meantime dropped the Google Garbage. Ie10 is really good enough, since lastpass and evernote Works, it's a winwin For me. If i want a spy always-on in My hard disk, i'll go back to Chrome AKA i-spy-and-call-at-home-every-ten-seconds.

What I Use

Like many, I was hoping to see a new Lumia flagship before the end of 2014, and while I was pleasantly surprised in some ways by both the Lumia 735 and 830, neither offers the level of performance or best-in-market camera quality I had come to expected from Microsoft/Nokia's high-end devices. So I pulled the trigger on an unlocked Windows Phone flagship that will hopefully take me through at least the first half of this year. Or until Microsoft gets off its low-end fixation and satisfies the needs of its biggest fans....More

It's been a while since the last What I Use, but there haven't been many major changes since late last year: Surface Pro 3 has become my go-to travel companion, I've added a third cellphone line for testing Windows Phone, Android and iPhone side-by-side, and have rotated through some new tablets and other devices. We've also switched from FIOS to Comcast and added to our set-top box collection....More